You can just refer to them as mixed race if you like.Personally, that's what I'm going to refer to them as, because it, is more convenient, but if you want to be more specific, you can refer to them as Mestizo, if they're European + Native American, or Mulatto, if they're European + African, or Zambo, if they're Native American + European.The Spaniards have already gone to all the trouble of naming these, entities, so we don't have to.

Generalizing all those millions of people as a non-descript mixed race will never fly with the crazy liberals, each mixture would have to be specifically named like Eurasian wouldn't be specific enough. There'd be countless hybrids from all corners of the planet. Eskimozambique rings nicely. And each hybrid would get special but different allowances by law depending on their history of guilt and victimhood.

Eurasians would be good for people of European and Asian descent.

Well...let's fight those liberals, not only with ideas, but with language itself.Let's start referring to so called 'African Americans', 'Native Americans', 'Hispanics', 'Jews' and so on as mixed race, or hybrids, because that's what they really are, and that's how we should think of, feel about, and treat them as.There isn't much all that distinctive about them, they're a hodgepodge, a mishmash.Mixed people all kind of look the same, especially heavily mixed people.They probably think, feel and behave similarly too.Their histories start becoming more homogeneous as well.

I think the White and Black identifiers need to be retired.. replaced by more specific identifiers, that the identified is content with/happy to be identified as, so if some are more African and Native, then they should remain as African-American and Native-American.

This is not rocket science.. it's about giving people props as to what they are, without the demeaning and derogatory labels of the past.

I think the White and Black identifiers need to be retired.. replaced by more specific identifiers, that the identified is content with/happy to be identified as, so if some are more African and Native, then they should remain as African-American and Native-American.

I think we should keep both broad identities such as white, black and Asian, and narrower identities, such as Irish, German, Nigerian, Ethiopian, Chinese, Japanese and so on.Irish have more in common with Germans than they do Nigerians and Ethiopians, racially, ethnically and culturally, like Nigerians have more in common with Ethiopians than they do Irish and Germans, at least racially, so it makes sense to think of ourselves in both broad, and narrower senses, altho racially, ethnically and culturally Nigerians and Ethiopians are more different.There's more racial, ethnic and cultural diversity in Africa than there is in Europe, because Africa is a big continent, whereas Europe is more of a subcontinent of Eurasia, which of course includes other subcontinents such as West Asia/Middle east, South Asia and East Asia.

This is not rocket science.. it's about giving people props as to what they are, without the demeaning and derogatory labels of the past.

I don't think white, black and Asian are necessarily demeaning and derogatory, unless we make them.For me, and I know I'm not alone, they don't carry any negative connotations.But if you prefer, you can use European and African instead.

I don't think white, black and Asian are necessarily demeaning and derogatory, unless we make them.For me, and I know I'm not alone, they don't carry any negative connotations.But if you prefer, you can use European and African instead.

The UK prefers to use geographical identifiers now, rather than colour identifiers.. do you think the US and other nations will be following suit any time soon? Is this even on the Government's agenda for scrutiny?

I think genealogical identity is a beautiful gift for everyone, that the malfeaseance has not been to identify people by color or physical attribute, but to convince any man or woman that these are reasons to feel shame, and ao should be treated as non-existant! Of course they are existant, so it is simply a tacit acceptance that some genealogies are reasons to feel shame!

I myself am a product of many generations of white Europeans in a country where white is a minority. I used to think it was a matter of accepting my forebearers' tacit white supremacism or becoming ashamed of being white. But this made me uncomfortable, so I shifted my abstract theoretical knowledge handed down by my white supremacist ancestors to experience of the attributes of all genealogies around me.

And it opened up one fucking hell of a beautiful world.

The reason whites think they are supreme is that white people are products of millenia of generations focused on civilization building. A lot of built up knowledge of the world and how to deal with it. While other colors indicate very different histories. Whites have found this terrifying. Since I ventured to experience the world as some of my black brothers do, I realize there is a fertility among us rather than a danger.

Black people and brown people should be proud, not embarrased, of their genealogies. Then they would attract white people more and much more sex would be had.

The problem is not so much white people as certain white persons forcing us all to be embarassed of the beautiful histories that is our genealogies.

"I am not fazed by myself. I have dragged myself through too much of myself to be fazed. Others are disturbed by the slightes articulation of themselves. But they are unfazed by the machine."

Pedro I Rengel wrote:I think genealogical identity is a beautiful gift for everyone, that the malfeaseance has not been to identify people by color or physical attribute, but to convince any man or woman that these are reasons to feel shame, and ao should be treated as non-existant! Of course they are existant, so it is simply a tacit acceptance that some genealogies are reasons to feel shame!

I myself am a product of many generations of white Europeans in a country where white is a minority. I used to think it was a matter of accepting my forebearers' tacit white supremacism or becoming ashamed of being white. But this made me uncomfortable, so I shifted my abstract theoretical knowledge handed down by my white supremacist ancestors to experience of the attributes of all genealogies around me.

And it opened up one fucking hell of a beautiful world.

The reason whites think they are supreme is that white people are products of millenia of generations focused on civilization building. A lot of built up knowledge of the world and how to deal with it. While other colors indicate very different histories. Whites have found this terrifying. Since I ventured to experience the world as some of my black brothers do, I realize there is a fertility among us rather than a danger.

Black people and brown people should be proud, not embarrased, of their genealogies. Then they would attract white people more and much more sex would be had.

The problem is not so much white people as certain white persons forcing us all to be embarassed of the beautiful histories that is our genealogies.

Mags wrote: The UK prefers to use geographical identifiers now rather than colour identifiers

Diversity questionnaires reference both but geography is the more preferred of the two as that information is more detailedSo you are more likely to be asked if you are British / Irish / Pakistani / Bangladeshi / Carribean than white / black / brown

Pedro I Rengel wrote:I think genealogical identity is a beautiful gift for everyone, that the malfeaseance has not been to identify people by color or physical attribute, but to convince any man or woman that these are reasons to feel shame, and ao should be treated as non-existant! Of course they are existant, so it is simply a tacit acceptance that some genealogies are reasons to feel shame!

I myself am a product of many generations of white Europeans in a country where white is a minority. I used to think it was a matter of accepting my forebearers' tacit white supremacism or becoming ashamed of being white. But this made me uncomfortable, so I shifted my abstract theoretical knowledge handed down by my white supremacist ancestors to experience of the attributes of all genealogies around me.

And it opened up one fucking hell of a beautiful world.

The reason whites think they are supreme is that white people are products of millenia of generations focused on civilization building. A lot of built up knowledge of the world and how to deal with it. While other colors indicate very different histories. Whites have found this terrifying. Since I ventured to experience the world as some of my black brothers do, I realize there is a fertility among us rather than a danger.

Black people and brown people should be proud, not embarrased, of their genealogies. Then they would attract white people more and much more sex would be had.

The problem is not so much white people as certain white persons forcing us all to be embarassed of the beautiful histories that is our genealogies.

Summary: "non whites are incompetent illiterates and should embrace that because it is romantic."

Spend some time talking to Pakistani engineers or Japanese architects.

As we know, modern engeneering and architecture are white innovations. I simply feel that it makes the pakistani sexier if he sees himself as not being of the genealogy that originally came up with it. As engeneering being something he added to his already ridiculously rich genealogy.

Or should he be embarrassed that it was not already part of his genealogy?

In which way does he most own the engeneering?

"I am not fazed by myself. I have dragged myself through too much of myself to be fazed. Others are disturbed by the slightes articulation of themselves. But they are unfazed by the machine."

Eminem's honest introspection used to achieve the same effect. But he is no longer capable of that honesty. In his defence, it was fucking heavy. I'm just happy he's rich now and no longer torturing himself. Though it's possible that an addict never truly stops torruring himself. But his family is taken care of and he gets to sit on nice leather couches.

"I am not fazed by myself. I have dragged myself through too much of myself to be fazed. Others are disturbed by the slightes articulation of themselves. But they are unfazed by the machine."

Mags wrote:The UK prefers to use geographical identifiers now rather than colour identifiers

Diversity questionnaires reference both but geography is the more preferred of the two as that information is more detailedSo you are more likely to be asked if you are British / Irish / Pakistani / Bangladeshi / Carribean than white / black / brown

..if all else fails, there is always the Other box to tick, and an accurate ethnic description can be made there.

I have never seen a /Carribean than white/ descriptor, and doubt that one has ever existed, but White and Caribbean mixed does.. is that what you meant?

I don't think white, black and Asian are necessarily demeaning and derogatory, unless we make them.For me, and I know I'm not alone, they don't carry any negative connotations.But if you prefer, you can use European and African instead.

The UK prefers to use geographical identifiers now, rather than colour identifiers.. do you think the US and other nations will be following suit any time soon? Is this even on the Government's agenda for scrutiny?

I'm not sure, but I'm not opposed to government preferring terms such as Afro-Canadian or Euro-Canadian over black and white.

Are we all African or European? The theories seem to default to a narrow beginning of hominids, all deriving from one ancestral line. Personally, I don't believe that we are all derived from one ancestral line of forefathers and evolution theory cannot get it together with enough evidence of how these mutations would occur, so their theories are bumpkus man, bumpkus.

I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.